We all know about Ad Hom. It’s the most cited logical Fallacy. It’s easy to understand, easy to remember and sounds fancy.
Who doesn’t want a good Latin name by their side in a debate?
The problem is that mostly, this Fallacy is wrongly used.
How? Allow me.
Ad Hominem is NOT a fancy term for insults. It just isn’t.
Insults are not fallacies. They’re frowned upon but they don’t make an argument logically weaker.
Ad Hominem is countering your argument on this basis of a personal charecteristic.
Example:
Insult: The statistics given in footnote 1 prove that you’re wrong you elvish-mark’d, abortive, rooting hog! Therefore you’re wrong !
Ad Hominem: You’re wrong because you’re an elvish-mark’d, abortive, rooting hog!
See the difference?
The insult here was a comment on the person but they it didn’t progress the argument to call the insults the reason someone is wrong.
The ad Hominem on the other hand established that someone is wrong BECAUSE of the insults attributed.
This is a graphic to visually represent Ad Hominems:
I hope this was Educational, thanks for reading.
Originally published at the-educational-blog.quora.com.
